Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2008 June 7

= June 7 =

Stronger Rewrite Template
Is there a stronger template to invoke an article rewrite than " "? Referring the Wikiprojects Novels: List of characters in Maximum Ride. ChyranandChloe (talk) 02:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yikes, that's a lot of amboxes. I think that's about the best you can do, what's already there. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:TEMPLATES shows a lot of our template messages (I hesitate to say "all" because anybody can make more templates and forget to list them on that page). However, I agree with Ten Pound Hammer 's assessment. Even if there are more problems with the article than the cleanup-rewrite template currently lists, why not begin by fixing those problems before worrying about how many more problems the article has? It's better to fix a problem than to keep piling more templates on a page with problems. Wikipedia has an enormous backlog of pages that need work (see WP:CLEANUP), and adding to the backlog is unlikely to speed up working through the backlog. I might also point out that if you can learn to fix just one kind of problem, then you can help a lot by going around and fixing that problem on many articles. It's easier to learn how to fix one problem than to learn how to fix every different kind of problem a very bad article has. I suspect many new users may get discouraged by focusing on articles instead of individual problems. A bad article has so many problems that they tend to overwhelm a new user, since each type of problem requires considerable knowledge of Wikipedia to solve. If every Wikipedia user would learn to fix just one kind of problem, then we could work together and clean up the mess. --Teratornis (talk) 06:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * All pages in the template namespace are in this link, although many are in the Wikipedia: or User: namespaces ...... Dendodge  .. Talk Help 16:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think I'll give it a try sometime, it's just that the fans writing the article are simply out pacing whatever I, or in that case whoever had attempted, can realistically offer. Your statement to fix one problem at a time is rather idealistic; to follow Wikipedia's Novel guidelines it would probably be easier to start from a fresh slate and outline each character from there - that is why I was wondering whether there was a stronger rewrite template, perhaps then the fans can get the point on what they're aiming for and we can get an article that won't end in vain.  Nevertheless, I think we found our template, and I've got to thank TenPoundHammer for helping out.  It's resolved then. ChyranandChloe (talk) 02:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

to hear how a word is pronounced
some sites allow you to hear how a word is correctly pronounced. Does Wikipedia do this? If so, how? Donnafield2005 (talk) 11:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * A sound file is uploaded using Upload. Then the sound file is placed on the article using audio. Best, PeterSymonds (talk)  11:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Pronunciations are recorded and uploaded like any other media, then inserted into the article with a template. See Antidisestablishmentarianism for a sample and Category:Articles including recorded pronunciations for a full list.  You can get more help on this at the Pronunciation task force.  See also Category:Spoken articles.  --——  Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  12:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Unable to copy and paste from Wikipedia to a word document
After many years of being able to copy and paste from Wikipedia to Word documents I am unable to do so at this time. I am able to copy and paste to Word documents from other web pages and documents. I am using a Mac and MS Word 2004. I recently installed OS X 10.5.3. Please help. Thanks, Michael —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tidestar (talk • contribs) 13:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Try the ref desk. 92.5.60.199 (talk) 16:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The "ref desk" is located at Reference desk. -- RyRy5 ( talk ) 19:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Specifically, you want Reference desk/Computing. Another idea is to search the Web for some keywords in your question; if the problem is common to other users, someone may have written about it on one of the many online discussion groups or mailing lists. For example:, but nothing jumps out on the first page of search results. You might try varying the search terms, or maybe there is a Mac-specific group you can ask. --Teratornis (talk) 05:15, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Moving a page using AutoWiki Browser
Yesterday the Gateway Football Conference changed its name to the Missouri Valley Football Conference (Link) and I'd like to move the page. However, there are a lot of links to the GFC article and I was told that having someone who uses the AWB make the move and update links would make the process a lot easier. I'd be grateful to any AWB users who could assist me in this. Thanks. Geologik (talk) 14:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Nevermind..someone already moved it without AWB. Geologik (talk) 16:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

List of characters in Maximum Ride
I've added references to all of the character's bios within this article, but for some reason the 'References' heading with all the refs under it won't show up in the article. When you go to edit the page, everything's there and it should show up, but it doesn't. Any idea why? ~ Bella   Swan ? 15:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I've fixed it. ~ Bella   Swan ? 15:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The FAQ has an entry for this: WP:EFAQ (FAQ/Editing), but that would be somewhat difficult to find unless you already knew it was there. --Teratornis (talk) 05:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Forum for reporting NOR
What is the appropriate forum for reporting NOR violations after a final warning. Apparently WP:AIV is only for vandalism, and WP:NORN is only for discussion of OR. This is in regard to User:John C. Huang, who has twice posted his relativity theory to User talk:Skeletor 0 since being given a final warning about doing such things. —teb728 t c 21:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:NORN should be OK for reporting NOR violations, as the first line from that page says "This notice board is provided so that editors can ask for advice about material that might be original research or original synthesis.". :-)  Stwalkerster  [  talk  ]  21:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Even if it is the wrong place, the admins there will be able to help out or point out where the right noticeboard is. Paragon12321 (talk) 21:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Help me understand this more, was the WP:OR posted to a talk page or an article? There is nothing specifically wrong with posting original research on a talk page, and even less when we're talking about a user talk page. However, if there is an actual article in question, please reference it here. Thanks. Tiggerjay (talk) 05:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Talk page guidelines explicitly applies NOR to talk pages. This makes sense: Article talk pages are only for discussing improvements to articles. Inasmuch as OR is forbidden in articles, it is also out of place in article talk pages. Inasmuch as user talk pages are supposed to be Wikipedia related, OR is out of place there too. I would think nothing of it if a user posted OR once or twice on a talk page. But this particular user’s edit history shows nothing but posting OR.
 * The final warning referred to an article talk page. It was posted by another user; so I am not the only one who thinks his talk page posts are unacceptable. Another user (beside myself) also left him a non-final warning about his talk page posts. —teb728 t c 07:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Forbidden would be a strong word -- users are encouraged to work out factual errors in the talk page and this would certainly include OR in the talk pages of both the article and user talk paces. I can see that no edits have been made in at least a week to non-user-talk pages, so it may not be a urgent issue anymore. Assume some good faith that he is really trying to improve the article, and go from there. All I see is a bunch of canned warnings, but very little discussion on his talk page about working through WP:OR; WP:RS; WP:VER; etc. Try that first. Direct his energy towards those policies instead of biting - or at least that is how it appears. This user does not appear malicious, but rather misguided. He needs to have the policies clearly placed before him without jumpping down him, and then, as necessary a short term block - to let it sink in. Tiggerjay (talk) 15:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, look again. Of the 18 messages to him, only 8 are canned messages (including the welcome). In the non-canned messages he has been asked several times to learn and observe the rules, and he has been told what the relevant policies are: As early as 20 December, DVdm pointed him explicitly to OR, RS, and NPOV. On 15 March I told him he is not allowed to post a theory “unless it has been published previously in a reliable source.” On 19 May P0M told him that Wikipedia is “not a place to publish the viewpoints or speculations of people whose work has not been accepted by experts in those fields.” And yes, of course it is appropriate to work out factual error on talk pages, but that is not what he is doing. Instead he seems to be seeking a publisher and/or a discussion forum for his theories. —teb728 t c 08:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

RfC on Burmyanmar
The Request for Comment/Myanmar vs Burma was originally posted as a "two week" RfC. The two weeks are up, and the discussion appears to have died down, though it's pretty clear that no consensus has been reached and people are simply pounding on their pulpits. Not sure what should happen next. Somedumbyankee (talk) 22:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Coin flip would solve it. --barneca (talk) 22:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually suggested that a while back, but most of the participants believe that their side is the "obvious" answer and a random choice would insult Wikipedianess. Somedumbyankee (talk) 23:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This has actually been getting attention from the news regarding this problem, as seen in Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-06-02/In_the_news there is a link to an article here. Tiggerjay (talk) 15:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to try the cabal. Somedumbyankee (talk) 22:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Table Editing: How do I centre a column?
I know how to center a cell using the align="center" command, but is there a way to do this for a whole column?

A lot of the Wikipedia tables would look better with centred columns, but it's a pain to format every individual cell. Cngoulimis (talk) 23:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a good question. We can, and that finds some results, including:
 * Help desk/Archives/2008 April 7
 * The question stumped the Help desk that time, apparently. You could look at the rest of the search results and see if someone found an answer to a different repeat of the question. Failing that, you could try asking on WP:VPT. Of course we can search that too:
 * That particular search does not seem to show any promising results. --Teratornis (talk) 03:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That particular search does not seem to show any promising results. --Teratornis (talk) 03:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Use the CSS command text-align
 * E.g.


 * --IMandIR (talk) 04:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You can centre an entire table (as Imandir mentions), but centring an individual column is impossible because there's no way to generate the HTML that would do that, except by centring each cell in it individually. --ais523 14:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * How about with a nested table for each column?

{| style="border:0; cellpadding:0; cellspacing:0"






 * }
 * That doesn't really improve the syntax (to say the least), and would probably confuse other editors, but it's a way to force alignment within columns. (I don't know enough about table coding to remove the annoying space between the resulting columns, but I'm sure someone else knows.) --Teratornis (talk) 17:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)